MAHAVIR SINGH Vs. VICE CHAIRMAN DDA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) 1996. By this order, the respondents were directed to consider the case of the petitioner for regularisation on work charge basis in accordance with the relevant rules applicable to similar workmen and in case any person Junior to the petitioner had been regularised, the petitioner was also directed to be regularised on and from the date when his Juniors were regularised. Petitioner was also held entitled to back wages in accordance with law.

(2.) . On notice of the petition being served upon the respondent affidavits have been filed by the respondents stating inter alia that none of the persons junior to the petitioner has been regularised in service in any of the construction projects on work charge basis. It is submitted that though some persons who were working on ad-hoc basis had been regularised but their regularisation had nothing to do with the petitioner inasmuch as the petitioner was not similarly placed and he could not be compared with those employees who were working on ad hoc basis. The petitioner has also been paid a sum of Rs.62,172/- as back wages.

(3.) . Since no one is present on behalf of the petitioner. I have no reason to doubt the affidavits of the respondents. In my view, no case is made out for initiating contempt and the petition is, accordingly, dismissed.